Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 May 2014 10:07:53 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/3] futex/rtmutex: Fix issues exposed by trinity |
| |
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 05:17:35PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > No, its perfectly fine to have a lock sequence abort with -EDEADLK. > > Userspace should release its locks and re-attempt. > > I agree. If I can prove that it's actually a deadlock, and > that unlock/relock will work to fix it, then we can arrange for glibc > to return EDEADLK.
The only reason the kernel would return EDEADLK is because its walked the lock graph and determined its well, a deadlock. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |